The researchers base their conclusion on three well-designed case studies touching on various software applications. The case studies include evaluating bone fractures following traffic accidents, bone injuries caused by a spade, and gunshot wounds on the head, which offer valuable data on enhancing contemporary forensic investigations (Buck et al., 2008). The modeling software and haptic device used for the study boast high precision, low friction, superior fidelity, and output capacity of six degrees of freedom. In the present world, these are top-notch specifications for such discourses. However, replicating the study to verify the findings may prove a challenge due to the high cost of assembling all the specimens and equipment utilized therein (Pinzon et al., 2016).
The researchers do well to draw their interpretations and conclusions from the gathered data involving the three separate case studies cited above. The results of the studies indicate that haptic devices can prove very valuable in post-mortem and forensic investigations. In forensic science, the research can be instrumental in enabling investigators to recreate a crime scene (such as gun-holding position) and identify the object used in the crime with enhanced precision and speed. Hagmann et al. (2021) thus note that the use of haptics in forensic science can hasten the criminal justice process and make investigations more reliable.
The research is highly innovative as it facilitates the use of technology to recreate crime scenes and enables the user to get the sense of touch often lost during such virtual excursions. Thus, the user can handle and feel 3D digital information, which is significant innovation and improves current technologies. According to Joukal et al. (2015), there may arise controversies surrounding the use of haptics due to fears of corrupting operating systems and online hacking to manipulate investigation findings. Such possibilities may impact the reliability of such devices in criminal justice proceedings. In terms of ethics, the machines make investigations much more expensive to conduct due to costly equipment and training for personnel involved (Fahrni et al., 2019). The costs may hinder the quest for justice in some cases, primarily in low-income areas. Nevertheless, the innovation is evident, and the researchers do well to draw solid conclusions based on their three well-designed case studies.
References
Buck, U., Naether, S., Braun, M., & Thali, M. J. (2008). Haptics in forensics: the possibilities and advantages in using the haptic device for reconstruction approaches in forensic science. Forensic Science International, 180(2–3), 86.
Fahrni, S., Delémont, O., Campana, L., & Grabherr, S. (2019). An exploratory study toward the contribution of 3D surface scanning for association of an injury with its causing instrument.International Journal of Legal Medicine, 133(4), 1167–1176. Web.
Hagmann, K., Hellings-Kuß, A., Klodmann, J., Richter, R., Stulp, F., & Leidner, D. (2021). A Digital Twin Approach for Contextual Assistance for Surgeons during Surgical Robotics Training.Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 8, 735566. Web.
Joukal, M., & Frišhons, J. (2015). A facial reconstruction and identification technique for seriously devastating head wounds.Forensic Science International, 252, 82–86. Web.
Pinzon, D., Byrns, S., & Zheng, B. (2016). Prevailing Trends in Haptic Feedback Simulation for Minimally Invasive Surgery. Surgical Innovation, 23(4), 415–421.